Multiple Routes to Animal Consciousness: Constrained Multiple Realizability Rather Than Modest Identity Theory

Frontiers in Psychology 12:732336 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The multiple realizability thesis (MRT) is an important philosophical and psychological concept. It says any mental state can be constructed by multiple realizability (MR), meaning in many distinct ways from different physical parts. The goal of our study is to find if the MRT applies to the mental state of consciousness among animals. Many things have been written about MRT but the ones most applicable to animal consciousness are by Shapiro in a 2004 book called The Mind Incarnate and by Polger and Shapiro in their 2016 work, The Multiple Realization Book. Standard, classical MRT has been around since 1967 and it says that a mental state can havevery manydifferent physical realizations, in a nearly unlimited manner. To the contrary, Shapiro’s book reasoned that physical, physiological, and historical constraints force mental traits to evolve in just a few, limited directions, which is seen as convergent evolution of the associated neural traits in different animal lineages. This is his mental constraint thesis (MCT). We examined the evolution of consciousness in animals and found that it arose independently in just three animal clades—vertebrates, arthropods, and cephalopod mollusks—all of which share many consciousness-associated traits: elaborate sensory organs and brains, high capacity for memory, directed mobility, etc. These three constrained, convergently evolved routes to consciousness fit Shapiro’s original MCT. More recently, Polger and Shapiro’s book presented much the same thesis but changed its name from MCT to a “modest identity thesis.” Furthermore, they argued against almost all the classically offered instances of MR in animal evolution, especially against the evidence of neural plasticity and the differently expanded cerebrums of mammals and birds. In contrast, we argue that some of these classical examples of MR are indeed valid and that Shapiro’s original MCT correction of MRT is the better account of the evolution of consciousness in animal clades. And we still agree that constraints and convergence refute the standard, nearly unconstrained, MRT.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 99,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Multiple Realizability, Constraints, and Identity.Mark Bauer - 2013 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (4):446-464.
The Mind Incarnate.William Bechtel - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):497-500.
The mind incarnate. Lawrence A. Shapiro. Cambridge, MA, and London, UK.William Bechtel - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):497–500.
The case for multiple realization in biology.Wei Fang - 2018 - Biology and Philosophy 33 (1-2):3.
Problem zwierzęcej świadomości.Krzysztof Chodasewicz - 2009 - Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia (2):67-79.
Multiple realizability: Also a difficulty for functionalism.Mehdi Nasrin - 2000 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 7 (7):25-34.
Empirical Evidence and the Multiple Realization of Mental Kinds.Danny Booth - 2018 - Dissertation, University of Western Ontario

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-06-26

Downloads
19 (#958,647)

6 months
7 (#564,683)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (4):435-50.
What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1979 - In Mortal questions. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 435 - 450.
Sensations and brain processes.Jjc Smart - 1959 - Philosophical Review 68 (April):141-56.
What is it Like to be a Bat?Thomas Nagel - 2003 - In John Heil (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Psychological predicates.Hilary Putnam - 1967 - In William H. Capitan & Daniel Davy Merrill (eds.), Art, mind, and religion. [Pittsburgh]: University of Pittsburgh Press. pp. 37--48.

View all 22 references / Add more references